Potatoe1 wrote:Ballard has played like a 1.5 mill 6/7 defenseman, so yeah he is terribly over paid and the cap hit is very bad. Booth on the other hand scored at a 23/82 pace with out significant ice time. His contract is probably fine if if the cap is in the high 60's low 70's. With a shrinking cap he might be a little over paid but there is no comparison between his deal and Ballards. I also think Booth can improve his numbers if he can stay healthy, he was looking quite good before his leg injury.

Yeah I'm not worried about Booth, he will come back strong and has already showed signs of getting better here, plus he will be getting quality minutes with Kesler and 2nd unit powerplay time. When he's fully healthy and get's more in tune with our systems I see him having a superb 2013-14' season, barring injury of course.

I'd like Ballard if he had a $1.5M cap hit for THIS situation on the Canucks as a bottom pairing 5th dman.

However I can really see KB flourishing on a team with not much pressure on them, while getting quality minutes (20-23 minutes per game) and powerplay/pk time, plus not playing with the bottom six forwards constantly! Like his best days with Phoenix when his partner was Morris iirc. Or in Florida with Boynton/Leopold.

Not to mention Ballard got to play with the better players on that team and he excelled! imo a team's management that has seen Ballard play when he was with Florida or Phoenix could pull the trigger to deal for him, while Ballards value is below what it should be and their team needing a viable top 4 dman.

This is what MG should be looking at right now, especially with all the injuries on defense around the league, MG could find a decent 3rd line center, who can sub in on the 2nd line immediately, in return for KB.

As for Edmonton being in on RL and without any of Oilers infamous top 4 coming here, the only deal that can blow the socks off of Canucks management and is semi realistic is Gagner, Paajarvi, and Klefbom for RL and maybe Rodin/Suave.

Thereby letting Edmonton keep their core best players and finally adding a bonafide #1 goalie in the process.

But I still like the Washington ideal of Johansson, Neuvirth and a bottom 6 player like Chimera or Beagle or Hendricks for Luongo + Raymond(who can take Johans spot on the top LW position then probably flourish with Ovechkin/Backstrom. However wasn't MG keen on Brouwer at one point? Only problem is his new contract is way overpriced at 3yrs/$11M.

SKYO wrote:As for Edmonton being in on RL and without any of Oilers infamous top 4 coming here, the only deal that can blow the socks off of Canucks management and is semi realistic is Gagner, Paajarvi, and Klefbom for RL and maybe Rodin/Suave.

Thereby letting Edmonton keep their core best players and finally adding a bonafide #1 goalie in the process.

But I still like the Washington ideal of Johansson, Neuvirth and a bottom 6 player like Chimera or Beagle or Hendricks for Luongo + Raymond(who can take Johans spot on the top LW position then probably flourish with Ovechkin/Backstrom. However wasn't MG keen on Brouwer at one point? Only problem is his new contract is way overpriced at 3yrs/$11M.

not a snowballs chance in hell RL goes to edmonton.. as was said if coil involved its a 3 way deal sending RL elsewhere

SKYO wrote:As for Edmonton being in on RL and without any of Oilers infamous top 4 coming here, the only deal that can blow the socks off of Canucks management and is semi realistic is Gagner, Paajarvi, and Klefbom for RL and maybe Rodin/Suave.

Thereby letting Edmonton keep their core best players and finally adding a bonafide #1 goalie in the process.

But I still like the Washington ideal of Johansson, Neuvirth and a bottom 6 player like Chimera or Beagle or Hendricks for Luongo + Raymond(who can take Johans spot on the top LW position then probably flourish with Ovechkin/Backstrom. However wasn't MG keen on Brouwer at one point? Only problem is his new contract is way overpriced at 3yrs/$11M.

not a snowballs chance in hell RL goes to edmonton.. as was said if coil involved its a 3 way deal sending RL elsewhere

If Roberto's wife doesn't want him in Van then she sure as hell will veto Edmonchuk...just ask Mrs. Pronger....

dbr wrote:Honestly I do wonder if the Canucks wouldn't have been better off trying to sign Zbynek Michalek, Paul Martin, Anton Volchenkov or even Jordan Leopold or Toni Lydman rather than trading for Ballard.

Lots of competent defenders went that summer.

Forgetting one other...Willie Mitchell.

For me the most regretable aspect of that trade is not Grabner..he's third if at all. I hated losing the 1st rounder but more than anything it spelled the end of Mitchell as a Canuck. I realize it would've been a gamble at the time given his health issues and it wasn't that we cast him aside as I believe we offered 3 and he took 3.5 from LA. With the additions of Ballard and Hamhuis we couldn't match.

Can you imagine having Mitchell, whoever we would've chosen with the 1st, and Grabner right now. Imagine having Mitch in the Finals against the Bruins.

Mobility on the blue line is part of the Gillis philosophy and when they left neither Willie nor Mattias nor Sami had it.

Nevermind the injury situation, plus if I recall correctly Hockey Widow mentioned there were rumours that during the playoffs while Willie was out he made it known to the team that he would be more willing to return if negotiations were happening for an extension. If that's true I get where he was coming from, but still.. From the other side it could really be seen as burning a bridge.

Anyway the Canucks had been burned by injuries and lack of mobility on the blue line two years running, Mitchell was a part of both problems.

Gillis has always stated that he wants a good young player who is playing now (Carlson) and a prospect/pick (Forsberg) for Lou. We give them Ballard to replace Carlson and a swapping of bad contracts between Brouwer and Ballard.

"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

Gillis has always stated that he wants a good young player who is playing now (Carlson) and a prospect/pick (Forsberg) for Lou. We give them Ballard to replace Carlson and a swapping of bad contracts between Brouwer and Ballard.

Yeah some good options on Washington and NYI for a deal to be made.

Uncle dans leg wrote:

dbr wrote: Mitchell was a part of both problems.

He should've gotten the damn puck out I'd have let him go for that retarded play alone. Havlat probably sends him Xmas cards every year as a thank you

lol yeah that was the final nail in the coffin for Mitchell's eventual departure, with everything DBR said above.

Yeah, regarding Neiderrieter's trade demands, Gillis should be pursuing a trade with them, but would Lou waive for an Islander deal? Highly doubt it. But who knows maybe he holds a soft spot in his heart for them since they was the team that originally drafted him.

trade proposal

LuongoBallardHiggins

NiederreiterVisnovsky?

"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

Gillis has always stated that he wants a good young player who is playing now (Carlson) and a prospect/pick (Forsberg) for Lou. We give them Ballard to replace Carlson and a swapping of bad contracts between Brouwer and Ballard.

That would be the fleecing of all fleecing Dude. NO WAY IN HELL McPhee goes there. More likely is they go into a rebuild and unload Green and OV